Parking Fine - Adam Street, Cardiff

Mjhlraggett

Hi, I'm hoping for some sound advice please regarding a parking notice (PCN) issued on my vehicle at Adam Street car park, Cardiff. On 17th Jan, the required amount was paid and the ticket left on the dashboard as usual. On return, there was a PCN notice stuck to the car with breach code 01 "parked without displaying valid payment", asking for £100, reduced to £50 for early payment within 14 days. Unfortunately the ticket was face down on the dashboard.

I appealed the notice with Vinci, who rejected as expected, and they provided me with photo evidence of the reverse side of the ticket. The basis of my appeal is that the tickets are flimsy and feather-like, non-sticky, risking that the ticket has overturned (possibly even by wind in closing the door). I have the ticket, and on receipt of their response, I re-appealed to them, advising that my ticket number (which I believe to be a unique code on the front and reverse of the ticket) agrees to the number on their photograph. Anyway, they are having nothing of it and have issued me with a standard response, not disputing that I have paid, but saying there is a failure to display, thereby breaking the terms and conditions.

They have provided a POPLA form, so I guess this will be my next step. I am not going to pay them because I noticed an identical case to this posted by Brynglas on 3/10/13, in the same car park. Following advice, Brynglas wrote to POPLA along the lines below, and posted again on 11/12/13, with POPLA's verdict, allowing the appeal. I intend to do exactly the same, but wanted to double check with the forum in case there is any further advice that I should factor in. I would really appreciate any feedback, comments or suggestions. I have a few weeks to get the POPLA appeal sent in.

Here is Brynglas' appeal letter to POPLA:

With regards the request for payment of £100 for breach code 01 - parking without displaying a valid payment. The amount claimed by Vinci is liquidated damages and, as such, the Operator may only charge a genuine pre-estimate of loss that a rise from the alleged contravention.

The Operator has included a basket of costs, including the cost of erecting site signage and the cost of membership of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority, wages and uniforms which are Operational costs of running the business.

The entirety of the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be enforceable. However, some of the costs referred to do not represent a loss resulting from the alleged breach.

For example, were no breach to have occurred, then the cost of parking enforcement, such as erecting signage, would still have been the same.

Also, Contract with the Landowner is not compliant with the BPA Code of practice and no status to Offer Parking or enforce tickets.

Vinci do not own this car park and are acting merely as agents, Vinci has not provided me with any evidence that is it lawfully entitled to offer parking spaces, allege breach of contract or enforce parking charges (as evidenced in the Higher Court findings
In VCS v HMRC 2012), UKPC has no proprietary interest or assignment of title of the land in question.

I require Vinci to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed & dated contract with the landowner (not just a signed slip of paper from someone) because even if one exists, I say it does not specifically enable Vinci to pursue parking charge in the courts. This would not be compliant with the requirements set out in the BPA Code of Practice.

I contend, therefore, that you should allow the appeal on this ground.

I would be obliged if you could kindly acknowledge receipt of this further appeal information.

ezerscrooge

Try something along the lines of this below. Splits it all up nice and easy - and has some more depth to it.

[FONT=&quot]Car Reg : xxxxx[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Location: : xxxxxx[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Date of PCN issue : xxxxxx [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]PCN Number : xxxxxx[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]POPLA Verification Code: xxxxx[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Dear POPLA Assessor,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I am the registered Keeper of the above vehicle and I'm writing this to appeal a charge sent to me by YYY.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds: [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Unlawful penalty clause[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]No authority to levy charges[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Business Rates & Business Legitimacy[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The demand for a payment of £100 is punitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has no relationship to the loss that would have been suffered by the Landowner. The YYY signs states that a PCN would be issued for a “failure to comply” with the terms of parking, which indicates that the parking charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Accordingly, the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss. YYY has not provided any evidence as to how and why the parking charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss. Therefore the parking charge is punitive and an unenforceable penalty charge. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
The BPA Code of Practice states:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“19.5 If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that you suffer.“[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]and [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“19.6 If your parking charge is based upon a contractually agreed sum, that charge cannot be punitive or unreasonable. “[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I put YYY to strict proof that that their charge represents a genuine pre-estimate of loss. To date YYY have refused to provide me with a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the “charge” was calculated in the form of documented, specific evidence applicable to this car park and this alleged incident. I am aware from Court rulings and previous POPLA adjudications that the cost of running the business For example, were no breach to have occurred then the cost of parking enforcement (for example, erecting signage, wages, uniforms, office costs) would still have been the same and, therefore, may not be included in this pre-estimate of loss.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Unlawful penalty clause - revenue for YYY[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged, this 'charge' can only be an unlawful attempt at dressing up a penalty to impersonate a parking ticket, as was found in the case of Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008) also OBServices v Thurlow (review, February 2011), in Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This transparently punitive charge by YYY is a revenue-raising exercise and is therefore unenforceable in law. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No authority to levy charges[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A parking management company will need to have the proper legal authorisation to contract with the consumer on the landowner’s behalf and enforce for breach of contract.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]YYY must produce evidence to demonstrate that it is the landowner, or a contract that it has the authority of the landowner to issue charge notices at this location. I believe there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles YYY to levy these charges and to pursue these charges in their own name as creditor in the Courts and therefore has no authority to issue charge notices.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I put YYY to strict proof to POPLA that they have the necessary legal authorisation at this location and I demand that the YYY produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and YYY. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCNs, the lack of ownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contract to one that exists simply on an agency basis between YYY and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that YYY can lawfully use in their own name as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It has also been widely reported that some parking companies have provided “witness statements” instead of the relevant contract. There is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory on behalf of the landowner has ever seen the relevant contract, or, indeed is even an employee of the landowner. I require, if such a witness statement is submitted, that it is accompanied by a letter, on landowner’s headed notepaper, and signed by a director or equivalent of the landowner, confirming that the signatory is, indeed, authorised to act on behalf of the landowner, has read and the relevant terms of the contract and is qualified to attest to the full limit of authority of the parking company[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. Business Rates & Business Legitimacy[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As this car park is now being used for the purpose of running a business by YYY, which is entirely separate from any other businesses the car park services, and generates revenue and profit for YYY, I do not believe that YYY has the necessary planning permission or have declared the running of their business venture at this location to the Local Valuation Office and Local Authority for the purpose of the payment of Business Rates.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I put YYY to strict proof that the necessary planning permission is in place, and that they have registered the business they are operating at xxxxxxxxxx with the Valuation Office and to provide proof that Business Rates are being paid to the Local Authority, or to provide proof or explanation of their exemption from such Business Rates. Failure to do so indicates that they are not operating a legitimate business from the premises.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This concludes my appeal.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Kind regards[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Yep you need a current template not a Vinci template. Why not just use one of the examples in the NEWBIES sticky thread, as even the above version has a slightly old wording about witness statements in the 'landownercontract/no authority to levy charges' point.

Mjhlraggett

Great, thanks both.

Will check out the Newbies info as well, this is totally new to me so really looking for a fool proof appeal that has maximum chance of succeeding. Might be coming back to you for some further assurance !

Mjhlraggett

Just received the POPLA letter and my appeal was successful. The letter was very short saying that the PCN was issued incorrectly and that VINCI did not provide evidence of any breach of terms and conditions.

Thanks for the great advice.

Happy days !!

da_rule

Well done. If you don't mind, could you copy the text of the decision (minus anything which could identify you) onto the POPLA decision thread (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4488337).